Ah, good, a discussion at last!
But does that make them bad? And don't get cute with defining "bad."
In the scheme of things, swimsuit competitions are not that bad overall. They are merely a part of a larger system of subjugation, but the connection is rather oblique.
Let's put it this way: Do I watch beauty pageants? When alone, never, for they hold no interest for me. When with friends, and they wish to watch, sure, for it allows for group commentary and jokes. At such times, do I watch the swimsuit competition and judge the contestants? Of course. Am I being sexist at such moments? Absolutely. Is it a major crime? Not at all. I am enlightened enough about issues of degradation toward segments of humanity that I can get away with some group entertainment in a small area. The women that know me personally know that I treat them as equals.
After all, all of the contestants at a beauty pageant are subjected to the same criteria and areas of judgment, including physical beauty, career goals, musical/performing talent and ability, etc. In a pageant, aren't all the judgments subjective in nature? It's not as clear-cut as determining who's fastest at running 100yds or jumping a certain distance. Where's the discrimination?
What you say is true, but the "damage" is in the perpetuating of certain gender myths about roles, and that's a much larger discussion that this thread, though I'd be happy to engage you in it.
Secondly, does it really "stereotype social roles based on gender"? I mean, come on... we're simply talking about judging the relative physical beauty among a group of women -- men need not apply. Let's forget about political correctness for a minute. It IS a MISS America contest.
Oh, there are contests for men as well, and those are just as subjectively absurd. Yes, Miss America is an anachronistic concept that encourages a way of thinking in society toward women that is limiting toward them. They have made progress, but it's still dressing up a pig (metaphorically speaking, of course )
Further, how can you say it's stereotyping when everyone knows how a woman should look, and whether this or that woman comes close to what's universally understood as "normal" or "close-to-perfect" feminine beauty?
I disagree. What is beauty in central Africa and what is beauty in Utah are quite different. The fact that the Western media has been expanding Western ideals of beauty to cultures that didn't use to think that way is part of the whole stereotyping process. How damaging this is to those who do not measure up to this totally subjective and narrow definition of "beauty."
I'd like to know: what exactly is the "nonsense" that Hollywood, the media, the fashion industry is perpetuating? They are the outlets that are regularly blamed for the "stereotypes" but the genuine root cause lies elsewhere. I say the money men simply capitalize on the way things are.
It's a vicious circle: Hollywood presents images, consumers accept those images, then demand more like them, so more get produced, etc.
In my first year psychology class, we learned that when babies less than a year old where shown two photos of different people, they always picked the "pretty" man or the "pretty" woman when given a choice. It's my contention that we prefer what we do because it's the way we are wired. We all 'naturally' know what pretty, beautiful, attractive, handsome is. Why fight it?
Because we have evolved beyond needing to find the "healthy" mate only. That instinct is still within us, but there is no longer the imperative to only mate with the "beautiful" ones.
You covered a lot of ground with this statement. Like I told my sister about Afghani women, let them live in America for a couple of weeks... see how good life can be. Then send them back home and see if they are as defensive about their lifestyle. Some probably would, but you'd find some who were more than willing to go back to America. It's a blessing that they have no idea how good life can be.
Many would do as you say, and others, much to our surprise, would hate America for it's "moral degradation" (based on their religious beliefs). Not every JW would find our freedom intoxicating, and not every Afghani woman would want to live in America. Now, get rid of Taliban, absolutely! But live in America? I don't think so.
Are women (and men) given preferential treatment based on appearance? Of course, but that's not what this thread is about.
It was my point, and why, in part, bathing suit competitions are sexist -- they encourage this way of thinking.
My point here is simply to say/question whether its wrong to appreciate the beauty of the feminine (masculine) form when it happens into your life.
Not a bit. Enjoy it all you want. I was talking about beauty pageants, a very stilted form of reality, and not the sort of "Look at that handsome guy on the street over there" that women do, or "What a pretty girl that just drove by" that men do.
Rachel Welch and Ali McGraw are babes.
Not to me.
Britney Spears is a hottie.
She's ugly to me. Very odd nose.
Halle Berry is a sho-nuff babe.
Agreed.
Janet Jackson?
Nope.
Catherine Zeta-Jones?
Yes.
The list goes on and on and on. My point is: is it wrong to acknowledge those FACTS, either with words or a look?
No. My point was narrowly focused to a simple question, not an overall societal behavior.
Is doing so "sexist"?
Not necessarily what you are talking about. But the question I answered? Yes.
In most military systems, woman are banned from fighting. They can hold just about any other position, but combat soldier is barred from them.Is this banning them from combat "sexist", based on your definition, Seeker?
Yes.
In my opinion, it is. Next question: is that a bad thing?
I don't know. I've heard arguments both ways, and it hasn't been relevant enough to me to formulate a "dogmatic" answer.
